FUNDAY

Re DRAFT Part 1
2/11) AM

Sunday, February 12, 2017 11:26 PM
    My responses in "M2" below. - Cheers, Mike.

    Date: Sat, February 11, 2017 9:53 pm
    I thought I sent this yersterday or this morning, but it looks like it went to me. So this might be a repeat for you.

    Mike, you're showing me that I have a few more avenues to explore for Part 1.

    _M: Numbers 6 and 7 pose the question: what initiated the Great Flood? I see John Baumgardner proposed in 2007 that rotational tumbling of the earth induced by catastrophic plate tectonics caused megatsunamis. That is quite a leap.

    _L: In 2013 he seemed to propose that an asteroid orbited the Earth elliptically, causing monthly tidal pulls & megatsunamis.

    M2: Earth's angular momentum is a staggering 7.07 x 10 to the 33rd kilograms x meters squared/sec.  Tumbling is out of the question.  The Moon causes monthly tides.  Megatsunamis would require a much larger body, and an erratic orbit to induce flow in orthogonal directions.

    _M: Similarly, getting an asteroid or planetesimal to pass near Earth a number of times, but not hit it, and then leave, as the cause of megatsunamis requires some difficult and precise celestial mechanics, so it seems unlikely.

    _L: What if the planetoid were the Moon? I have a reference paper that shows calculations for circularization of elliptical orbits by dust or gases in space within decades to centuries.

    M2: The Moon would have to be much closer (but beyond the Roche limit) and would only cause water flow along its orbital path.

    _M: a meteorite swarm, associated with the first bombardment population of Moon craters, collapsed Earth's thick vapor canopy ... the sole source of water for the Great Flood.

    _L: Don't you think the oceans existed before the flood? Why do you think ICR's claim against a vapor canopy was wrong? I think the atmosphere was one or two bars thicker than now, like you said onsite, but I'm flexible on what was in the air that was lost, whether more water vapor, oxygen, nitrogen, or CO2. I didn't think precipitation could raise sea level much. How deep flooding do you figure?

    M2: I think a low ocean existed before the Flood.  Vardiman's main objection to a vapor canopy is his estimated temperature at Earth's surface.  I find the vapor canopy to be a reasonable source for a one-time global flood, to provide high atmospheric pressure that could favor gigantism in dinosaurs, and as a reason why rainbows could appear only after the flood.  Without today's mountain ranges (built 300 years post-Flood by SD), Flood waters would only have to rise 1000 feet or less to cover the land.

    _M: Members of the meteorite swarm falling into the ocean led observers on land to mistakenly call the resulting water jets "fountains of the great deep". Note that these started and ended at the same time as the rain deluge.

    _L: That's what Gordon says too. But he thinks precipitation didn't add significantly to the Flood. He says the Hebrew word, "matar", in the Bible meant meteors, and "geshen" meant gushing. I'll try to ask Gordon what he thinks of your statement.

    _M: A persistent question for Flood geology has been why the sediments of the geologic column did not end up on the Pacific Ocean floor. Apparently megatsunamis flowed from the outer oceans onto the protocontinent, scouring and depositing sediment and quadrillions of fossils of sea creatures. It is reasonable to think that each megatsunami grew as the water level rose, reaching farther inland with each wave. Precipitated vapor canopy water falling on land would leave freshwater remains, whereas waves moving in from the coast would leave saltwater remains. Each megatsunami would deposit its own stratigraphic sequence.

    _L: How are you saying that the water canopy was the sole source of the Flood, but that megatsunamis were involved too? I came across a website a couple days ago that said salts were deposited with the dinosaurs out West. How would you determine if Flood deposits involved fresh or salt water? Some NCGT articles claim that the ocean floors do have sedimentary rock. I think the seafloor drilling project found some sedimentary rock above the basalt. Did it not? I found one creationist article that said, I think, that some strata formed across North America and across north Africa before continental drift, but some higher strata also spilled out onto the Atlantic seafloor near Africa, apparently after continental drift had started. That's one reason I think SD may have occurred toward the end of the Flood. Do you think the KT iridium layer came from the SD impact? I thought maybe the Chixilub and others deposited the glass spherules etc below the iridium layer, and the SD impact produced the iridium.

    M2: Paleontologists can distinguish freshwater and saltwater denizens, which still exist today.  Clearly the most sweeping megatsunamis would have come from the rising ocean waters as the rain fell since they covered 60% or more of Earth's surface.  On the other hand, water rising on the protocontinent would have flowed outward.  The sediment layer on the seafloor averages only .5 km thick.  There are lots of examples of spreading and stretching of continental crust involved in separation, which is another reason that brittle Plate Tectonics is faulty.  I think the K-Pg iridium layer and probably the glass spherules are associated with Chicxulub.  Conventional geologists require much time between deposition layers, whereas creationists expect simultaneous multiple deposition.  It was laid down long before the SD event, which I think produced the Australasian tektite strewnfield.

    _M: Regarding an Earth-killer impact, I think it is safe to say that the Moon falling into the Earth would do the trick.

    _L: Sounds like humor there. A friend, Charles, thinks a part of the Moon split off from the Moon and made a fairly soft landing, forming the supercontinent after the Earth had solidified. He reasoned that, otherwise, if it had occurred before Earth solidified, the granite would have melted and made a thin layer all over the Earth. Charles found that stars and planets likely form by electrical forces that cause galactic filaments to implode into plasma double layers. The interior should be solid because of having no degrees of freedom (and absolute zero temperature) where electrons get squeezed out into an upper layer. And a star can have about 5 double layers. Any spherical body in space about 200 miles or more in diameter would have double layers. The inner layers should be liquid. So the aesthenosphere should be liquid. Even 12.8 km deep in the Kola borehole the rock is too plastic to drill any deeper, so he says that's due to lack of sufficient electrons. He thinks the Moho is plasma. By the way, I read lately that the Kola borehole encountered a lot of saltwater most or all of the way down.

    M2: What evidence is there that the Moon ever split?  I think the conventional idea that the Moon formed following a planetesimal impact on Earth is right.  However, I agree that it happened much later than conventionally believed, so that a uniform basalt crustal layer encompassed the Earth at the time of the collision.  The subsequent mixing would have refined the molten basalt and upper mantle to allow differentiation of continental crust.  Seismic tomography indicates that the asthenosphere is solid rock at high temperature, allowing ductile flow.  Drilling 13 km into inland continental crust is less than halfway through.  The rock is probably gabbro under high pressure with enough plasticity to collapse a borehole.  Why would the Moho be plasma?